As may be determined by a review of the below cited patents, the prior art has failed to contemplate a system as taught in the present invention. Further, the patents cited below are fully distinguishable in construction and use, and are cited only as being at best remotely pertinent to the claimed invention.
A list of prior patents which may be of interest is presented below:
______________________________________ U.S. PAT. NO. Patentee(s) Issue Date ______________________________________ 2,101,285 Stevens 12/07/1937 2,937,065 L. Harza 05/17/1960 2,961,731 Buzzell et al 11/29/1960 3,202,412 Hunsucker 02/07/1967 3,411,305 A. Cella 11/19/1968 3,848,855 Weiland 11/19/1974 3,886,705 Cornland 06/03/1975 4,808,039 Fischer 02/28/1989 ______________________________________
A cursory review of the above cited patents shows that the prior art is indeed clearly distinguishable from and does not make "obvious" the present invention. Indeed most, if not all, of the cited patents are not part of the prior art of the invention but rather are from disparate, non-analogous arts.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,101,285 teaches a "tubular interlocking piling" of steel having interlocking structures incorporated therewith. The specification teaches the system as being used in the construction or reinforcement of coffer dams, bridge piers and the like. It is noted that the apparatus does not contemplate the utilization of a containment structure, although it does teach implementation as a support wall for above ground construction. Further, unlike the present invention, sealing means for preventing fluid migration is not taught.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,302,412 to Hunsucker teaches "interlocking sheet piles and method of installation", including means to slidingly engage and seal the sheet piles. This system is likewise obviously distinguishable from the present invention, for a variety of reasons. The '412 patent is directed to sheet pilings for forming earthen walls or cofferdams, and is not directed to containment systems, as discussed in the present invention. Further, implementation of the system is impractical, very costly and would be highly unsuitable for use in the types of soil conditions anticipated by the system of the present invention.
For example, the scraper 24 (FIG. 3) is inadequate to remove debris from the cavity 16 while the sheet pile is being driven into the soil. The "scraped" debris would not have anywhere to go, as the tolerance of the shoe and cavity connection is too little to be expected therethrough and the debris could not be pushed through the bottom of the cavity as it is already firmly embedded in packed soil.
While the tolerance of the engagement system is too small to allow scraping of debris therethrough, it is of sufficient tolerance that it allows liberal leakage of a fluid sealant, to the point that it would be impossible to accurately project a fluid impermeable seal on a consistently monitorable basis.
The lugs 30 (FIG. 2) as taught in the '412 patent render the system unworkable in terms of taking away the tolerance necessary for slidingly engaging the panels. The tolerance or gap between the shoe and cavity is needed to allow a smooth installation. Lastly, the construction is overly costly and highly impractical, with the necessity of multiple apertures to be fabricated therein, the alignment of apertures to both cavities, the removal and replacement of the feed tube at each driven pile, and the implementation of scrapers as taught in the specification in the field would be very difficult and time consuming. Thus, even if the system works as taught, it would be usable only with extreme cost and complexity of fabrication.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,886,705 to Cornland teaches a "Hollow Structural Panel of Extruded Plastics Material and a Composite Panel Structure Formed Thereof". The patent teaches a hollow structural panel configured to form partition walls or the like and is designed for resisting deformation due to load bearing. While the '705 patent does teach the utilization of a rubber gasket for preventing leakage of snow, rain, or the like, this apparatus is unsuitable for utilization in conjunction with the system of the present invention. Apparently, the system of the '705 patent would require complete fabrication above ground prior to installation, which would make the system unsuitable for use with the preferred method of the present invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,411,305 issued in 1968 to Cella teaches a "Tubular Interlocking Piling for Wall Assemblies". A variation of sheet piling technology, this patent contemplates a system of interlocking piling components in the construction of "cofferdams, walls, dams, piers, abutments, and other types of walls where strong construction is necessary."
The '305 disclosure discloses a "tubular pile unit" of a sufficiently strong material for forming a substantial load bearing wall; it is noted that the disclosure does not teach in any manner a fluid impermeable unit. Consequently, this apparatus is likewise unsuitable for the preferred system contemplated in the present invention. Further, it is noted that load bearing is not a factor in the present invention, for which factor the '305 patent is primarily designed.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,937,065 and 2,961,731 disclose fluid impermeable gasket systems fully distinguishable in use, method and apparatus from the present invention.
Not found during the patent search, but known to applicants, is an apparently unpatented method for containing hazardous waste. This present method of preventing the leaching of contaminated fluids frown hazardous waste sites comprises the implementation of a "slurry" wall around the site. A trench is dug to a sufficient depth to contact a fluid impermeable natural earth strata, such as clay.
A problem with preparing such a trench, however, relates to the soils' cohesive strength and its propensity for "caving." This system therefore often has had to resort to expensive sheet pilings to retain and strengthen the trench walls. As the sheet pilings typically were insufficient to prevent seepage of the containment therethrough, a still more expensive medium, typically bentonite, a naturally occurring clay, was used to fill the trench. This slurry would solidify, forming a fluid impermeable subterranean "dam" for containment.
The present invention is anticipated to cost substantially less than the most cost efficient slurry wall system, as it does not require sheet pilings or any other means of preventing "caving" because the present invention provides a series of guide box assemblies that create a temporary, isolated work space for the insertion and joining of the barrier members.
Other material costs of the present system are likewise significantly less, requiring as little as one-one-hundredth (1/100) of the amount of bentonite. It is noted that the bentonite costs fluctuate, but may run as high as two hundred ($200.00) dollars per ton including freight (freight on board) job site.
Likewise, the present invention does not require the utilization of piling equipment, heavy lift equipment, or extensive labor, as is necessary for implementation of the above system. Instead, no piling equipment, and only relatively available lifters and less extensive labor is needed.
Some additional patents are listed below:
______________________________________ U.S. PAT. NO. Patentee(s) Issue Date ______________________________________ 1,007,718 J. I. McGill 11/07/11 1,713,675 R. L. Parish 05/21/29 1,937,758 F. R. Harris 12/05/33 2,355,102 O. R. Odman 08/08/44 3,302,412 W. A. Hunsucker 02/07/67 3,479,827 A. R. S. Morrice 11/25/69 3,593,528 J. R. Pavese 07/20/71 3,864,921 Marx et al 02/11/75 4,059,964 Pavese 11/29/77 4,090,365 Nieber 05/23/78 4,145,891 Krings 03/27/79 4,194,855 Egger 03/25/80 4,259,028 Cook 03/31/81 4,407,612 van Weele 10/04/83 4,453,861 Bretz et al 06/12/84 4,484,835 van Klinken 11/27/84 4,519,729 Clarke, Jr. et al 05/28/85 4,537,536 Tsubonuma et al 08/27/85 4,607,981 van Klinken 08/26/86 4,657,442 Krings 04/14/87 4,659,260 Morelli 04/21/87 4,664,560 Cortlever 05/12/87 4,671,705 Nussbaumer et al 06/09/87 4,673,316 Nussbaumer et al 06/16/87 4,679,965 Glaser et al 07/14/87 4,697,953 Nussbaumer et al 10/06/87 4,741,644 Cavalli et al 05/03/88 4,753,551 Brueggemann et al 06/28/88 4,797,158 Harriett 01/10/89 4,808,039 Fischer 02/28/89 4,909,674 Konno et al 03/20/90 4,917,543 Cole et al 04/17/90 4,927,297 Simpson 05/22/90 4,929,126 Steenbergen et al 05/29/90 4,981,394 McLaren et al 01/01/91 4,993,880 Collins 02/19/91 5,013,185 Taki 05/07/91 5,096,334 Plank 03/27/92 ______________________________________
The '718, '675, '758, '412, '039, '543 and '394 patents are considered to be more pertinent to the sealing aspects of the preferred embodiment(s); the '827, '528, '921, '964, '365, '891, '028, '442, '260 and '334 patents are directed to various types of "trench boxes;" the '855, '612, '835, '861, '729, '536, '981, '705, '316, '965, '953, '644, '551, '158, '039, '297, '126, '880 and '185 patents are considered to be more pertinent to the over-all system of the invention; while the '102, '412 and '126 patents are considered to be more pertinent to various profiles used in various types of male/female joints used in a number of different items, some non-analogous to the present invention and all of which are significantly different from those used in the present invention, particularly those used in the interconnecting joints between the barrier members of the present invention.
With regard to "trench boxes", the prior art has contemplated numerous configurations for trench wall shoring devices and the like for preventing excavation cave-in, as evidenced by the sampling of patents noted above.
For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,659,260 issued in 1987 for a "Trench Box" discloses a system to prevent the caving in of an excavated area, providing a reinforced shoring system. However, the guide box assembly of the present invention, which contemplates a slotted mechanism specifically configured for installing the barrier containment members of the present invention, teaches a mechanical installation system fully distinguishable from the '260 patent.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,090,364 to Nieber discloses a "Portal Frame for Trench Box Stack" wherein there is provided an easily assembled and disassembled system, but which nonetheless does not teach nor contemplate the mechanical aspects or template system or methodology of the present invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,059,964 issued in 1977 discloses an opposed, support wall system for the installation of trench wall sheeting in side open areas in the wall system, which are positioned against the side walls of the excavation in which the trench wall sheeting is being installed. This system, while pertinent, is nonetheless fully distinguishable from the present system, as it does not teach nor contemplate the mechanical interrelationship or methodology of the present invention.
The other patents noted are likewise distinguishable from the present invention but are included to illustrate the state of the art. In summation, the guide box assembly system of the present invention does have substantial novelty with regard to the known trench box art above, especially with regard to the mechanical aspects of the invention as utilized in the installation of the barrier member containment system of the invention.
Most of the patents noted as being pertinent to the over-all system of the invention teach or contemplate a system for containing or preventing the lateral migration of fluids through the soil via fluid impermeable fabric or plastic sheeting subterranean structures or the like.
These patents typically rely upon a bentonite slurry or similar liquid means of preventing the caving in of the excavated area, and are thereby much more expensive to install when compared to the present invention. Further, these systems are distinguishable in their interlocking means for the various barrier members, which include systems which do not even contemplate a sealed connection along the various joined members, substantially reducing, if not eliminating, any reliable containment of toxic fluid wastes.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,679,965 to Glaser et al entitled a "Method and Apparatus for Installing Panels into Recesses in the Ground" discloses a containment system wherein a trench is excavated and filled with the slurry, and large high density polyethylene (HDPE) sheets are engaged through slotted arrangements in the trench to form a barrier. This system is distinguishable from the present system, as it utilizes a different profile, no seal, and no guide box assembly in the installation.
The noted patents further include unusual devices for excavating areas for the installation of containment systems, such as, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,013,185, issued in 1985 to Osamu Taki for a "Multi-Shaft Auger Apparatus and Process for Fixation of Soils Containing Toxic Wastes", as well as other similar excavation systems. For another multi-auger apparatus, note U.S. Pat. No. 4,537,536 to Tsubonuma et al for a "Process and Apparatus of Constructing a Water Tight Underground Pile Wall".
For a solid barrier containment system, see U.S. Pat. No. 4,407,612 to van Weele, which discloses a partially load bearing wall comprised of curved concrete shell members, connected via spreader joints. This patent is readily distinguishable from the present invention, as it teaches a totally different structure, operation, and installation from the present invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,453,861 to Bretz et al teaches an in situ system for pouring concrete to form barrier containment walls and is likewise readily distinguishable from the present invention.
With regard to the noted seal and the male/female profile patents, there is included various sealing means for panel members and other pertinent systems. For example, Cortlever U.S. Pat. No. 4,664,560 issued in 1987 teaches a subterranean containment system wherein there is provided (note FIG. 3) a heat activated seal for preventing the lateral migration of liquid therethrough. The system as taught is clearly distinguishable from a patentability standpoint.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,917,543 issued in 1990 teaches a "Wall System Employing Extruded Panel Sections" wherein there is taught a connector element (25) which may also act to seal the various installed panels. Again, however, this system is distinguishable from the present invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,302,412 issued in 1967 discloses a lug member 30 (note FIG. 2) configured to space the sheet piling into a proper interlocking installation. Also taught is the disposition of a sealant (36, FIG. 7) for preventing leakage of the system. Again, however, this is still just another profile and seal means which is clearly distinguishable from the present invention.
The Simpson '297 patent forms an impermeable barrier in an excavation made down to bedrock to contain waste materials in the ground, in which a sheet of impervious material, such as a fabric carrying a substantially dehydrated sodium-bentonite clay, is placed along the side walls of the excavation, and the rest of the excavation is then filled with concrete.
The van Klinken '835 & '981 patents are directed to waste containment systems in which "more or less flexible sheets or foils" are introduced into the soil by means of a "lance."
In the Nussbaumer et al '953 patent a fluid sealing material is introduced through pipes into the ground which thereafter solidifies, sealing the wastes in a dump. The Brueggemann et al patent likewise uses a piping system to provide "a sealing screen for waste dumps." The Nussbaumer et al '316 patent uses slotted wall connections which must be flushed out prior to using plastic foil sealing elements for sealing two adjacent barrier wall sections.
In the Cavalli '644 patent initially vertical coupling members are formed in spaced bore holes in the ground, with the space between them excavated, and then a sandwich of high density polyethylene sheets with an internal mesh is connected between the coupling members, forming an "environmental cut-off and drain." In the Clarke et al '729 patent a trench is made and a series of membrane fluid barriers are placed in it suspended between slotted end connectors.
The Konno et al '674 patent forms "an underground continuous water-impervious wall" by rolling out an impervious sheet of material into a trench and charging a hardening material against the opposite side surfaces of the impervious sheet and allowing the material to harden. In the Steenbergen et al patent a screen of flexible material is fed into a trench typically in a folded over fashion, with the top of the fold being held up by appropriate means in the unfilled trench.
The Cortlever '560 patent, referred to above in connection with seals, also discloses the use of dam wall sheets (1) of stainless steel or of a synthetic resin which are sequentially inserted into the ground using an enclosing, vibrating, injection guide (19) aided by earth loosening water jets (29), with one sheet being vertically engaged with the preceding darn sheet via male/female edge joints which are slid together. After one dam sheet is inserted into the ground, the vibratory injection guide is withdrawn to then be used for the next dam sheet.
The presence of all of these diverse, attempted 37 solutions" of the past to the challenge of forming an impermeable barrier about a waste area to be contained and the prior existence for many years of the various means used in the present invention to successfully meet this challenge provide further objective indicia or evidence of the "unobviousness" and patentability of the invention. In the parent application with co-inventor Moffett Ser. No. 07/985,944, the examiner has cited the additional references listed below:
______________________________________ U.S. PAT. NO. Patentee(s) Issue Date ______________________________________ 4,690,588 Berger 09/87 4,990,210 Glaser et al 02/91 5,106,233 Breaux 04/92 5,163,785 Zanelli et al 11/92 ______________________________________
In the related application with co-inventor Sansone Ser. No. 07/986,241, the examiner has cited the additional references listed below:
______________________________________ Patent No. Patentee(s) Issue Date ______________________________________ 1,679,319 Marshall 07/28 3,465,532 Belden 09/69 4,182,087 Schall et al 01/80 4,690,588 Berger 19/87 5,106,233 Breaux 04/92 32,808 Netherlands 1934 ______________________________________
However, none of these references, it is believed, add any significant disclosures with respect to the invention hereof not already discussed above, with the Breaux patent being one of the predecessor cases hereto, and both applications have been acknowledged to be directed to allowable inventions by their respective examiners.